Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36
clinton and the sexes them. it was appalling my husband said you are making it up. but it is worse than you think. we really did have some of that. >> is more complicated for women to present themselves physically because there is a lack of a legacy. to say this is what a woman president looks like from what she stands for or plans to do as president. >> it is not just something that affects women is against people that are short but those candidates as opposed to the men candidates. they will get attention because of his way to. the he will not rule and -- be ruled out. a woman might be. >> a good example was elizabeth edwards burger she was ridiculed for her weight and appearance even after she died some appointed to her appearance. it is a good example of the scrutiny they feel when they run for office or as the spouse's candidate. >> i cannot remember a single time someone said why is the president not wearing a suit or why as governor romney wearing jeans? i had a candidate who was known for wearing gucci loafers. that is the only example i can think of. >> jimmy carter wore the bl
clinton, worked under w. bush. they certainly saw differences in the presidencies, but they weren't necessarily ideological foes of the president. but they saw the operation, the planning of the operation stopped her stall three times in 2011 alone and they were credulous and asked why. with the valerie garrett didn't like the idea is a close adviser to the mentor and the first lady. i want to be clear. it's not that she ordered them to stop. as to the normal chain of command. they should stop working on it but not great when asked why commences the reason i came back. >> host: was valerie garrett involved in any of the discussions with hillary clinton, robert gates and land another? was she in the room quiet >> and clear probably not. there were a lot of discussions between valerie garrett and the president himself. remember barack obama has started about valerie garrett, he told "the new york times" in 2009, i never make an important decision without talking to valerie garrett first. he said that he meets with her two to three times a day. if you look away his visitor logs, you'
is hidden. i remember for a book i did called "the agenda" on bill clinton, and it was about his economic plan. i interviewed him once, and it was on background. but he's talked about it, so i have talked about it. and you go into to the oval office. this was early 1994, and clinton drills you with this eye contact that is absolutely a gravitational force. i've never seen anyone maintain eye contact like bill clinton. and to a -- and it's unblinking. and he just stares and, of course, it creates a sense of intimacy, it slows time down, and i remember thinking this eye contact is amazing, and somebody later suggested to me, said, well, he wanted to be president ever since he was 5. [laughter] and he decided to contribute all organs in the body to the task. [laughter] including the eyes. [laughter] and it's, you can drain yourself. you just don't -- you can train yourself, you just don't blink. so we're going through there, and i thought, oh, this is a great interview. and he's so focused. i each started thinking, oh -- i each started thinking, oh, he realizes how brilliant my questions are
clinton was running for reelection, at this point in the campaign he was not at 44%. he was at 504%. that is that 10 percent difference president obama has so destroyed the confidence of his own party in an independence that he is lagging ten points behind where bill clinton was. he is in terrible political say and for reasons i will review here shortly he is going to get worse before it gets better. i personally believe that 44 percent is a ceiling, not a floor. that is, inflated. my friend, great assistant to richard nixon, ronald reagan speech writer and adviser has long argued that there is no such thing as a bradley effect. the bradley effect is named for mayor tom bradley of los angeles when he ran against george deukmejian did not do as well in the final balloting is he had been doing in the polling. for years pundits have ascribe that to the brad the affected people are free to say they're not going to vote for african-american because they don't want to be up to the prejudice he they're talking anonymously to pollsters. and he has all the data, and i believe him, but i bel
involved in it the silly analysis of what happened after clinton raises tax rates or clinton drastically lowered the capital gains tax and that was where most of the new revenues came. but in general, fifty nations around the world have reduced their tax breaks sin wealthy and poverty was published. and draysly reduced the tax rates. not of these have flat tax an in all the countries of revenues of boom there hasn't been a big crisis of spending and estonia. there's a vast boom in estonia with the 12% flat tax and the fact is that sup ply side economics is booming around the world. it's only in the united states that some souls are shrinking from there economic of enterprise. >> what's your analysis of what's happening in donald rumsfeld would call old europe. >> old europe is flawing for the indulgent due luges of the welfare staid. they have all accepted again on centralized government and thus have destroyed vat l of their assets. when you detroit value of your assets ultimate i are the human being who would make your economy go, their investments and creation and work effort and make
but he never had a full congress that was republican. bill clinton did have a full congress that was republican but bill clinton was democrat. and you have fragmented government, george w. bush had a republican congress for four to eight years. george bush scarcely had the best domestic legislative accomplishment that could rival lyndon johnson or to be fair richard nixon. perhaps the 2012 elections will generate a unified government that will pass its preferred programs but it would be foolhardy, most observers at this time is the more or less maintenance of the status quo in which barack obama will continue to occupy the oval office as the republicans continue to patrol by reversed number of the house of representatives with the senate at this time being up for grabs. so we should be open for the possibility that the current election will fit the shakespearean description of sound and fury signifying nothing or very little with regard to domestic policy and that is what i am focusing on. perhaps not nothing. considered the conclusion of tom friedman's column on april 22nd
've done something about it, but then i just complying with the tax code he created. how could clinton get away with claiming that the republicans were the ones who deregulated and created the real estate and financial problems when he repealed glass-steagall in 1899. that was the underpinning, and away, of of the whole problem. i would say it's a cheap wine or two because in 10 short years, all the big banks, almost all of them another. i just wonder how he can get away with that and i was one of the hallmarks that give a bump at bill clinton's speech. does he just not want to admit it? or does he know that people will care or following research this? how does it make a statement in front of everyone? >> host: maria bartiromo. >> guest: we are in political season, right? it's all politics and so, you know, number one on the tax code, yes, that is what i just said. i agree with that. because a scene change over the last three years of her going to complain about people not paying their fair share, change the tax code. it is all legal. if a money manager can use whatever loopholes to lower
the trial and you remember the chief justice rehnquist presiding over the impeachment trial of bill clinton. but with the chief justice will is and how the chief justice is to be appointed in the federal circuit court of course the appeal if you become the chief judge by seniority so maybe what have come become the justice by seniority but no, president george washington thought otherwise and actually nominated a chief justice in that case and by separate commission, so that established the pattern some nominated to be the chief justice through the ranks. beyond that, how the court of reeds and what it conceives of as it's a distraction. many high courts around the world can give what we would call advisory opinions to the executive branch of their government or the legislative branch can say that, you know, if we get such and such would it pass muster and we say yes or no and if the answer is no they go back and redo it and bring it back again and it works that way. our core to very early on established it wouldn't wish you advisory opinions that there had to be an actual case or controver
. at the same time, during the clinton years, we had marginal rates that were a little bit higher than they are now and we had some of the best economic times that the country has ever seen. that is what i'm talking about. my concern for the country is that all of this heat has been generated around this issue instead of light and analysis and a sober look at the role that every american play, should play in strengthening our country. that is the concern i have in the long run. >> i want to pick up mr. cruz's suggestion that the economy is in trouble from -- is in trouble. texas has endured. but san antonio has had a tough couple of years. the census bureau report brought these numbers appeared between 2009 and 2011, unemployment in san antonio went up by more than a full point. needed household income has gone down. you know how tough the economy is. you're leaving a city that has been bearing some of the brunt. can you talk about that? few dispute that the economy is in a world of hurt? whoever's responsibility that is. >> i think every american would say that the economy is not wher
't to be. bill clinton butchers of beijing. he ends up forging a pretty strong relationship with china. so i think you have to discount a lot of the rhetoric and a lot of what you hear about, about priorities at this point. and probably conclude that when they do get in office that the harold macmillan words will probably drive things more than anything else. and that's defense, my dear boy, events. and then we get back to what you are saying. what will be their management style? what will be their ability a stunt history to respond to those events as they arise. spoonbill, what leadership is have you picked up? >> i think we have an incumbent president so presumably we know how he will be inclined to cover but i suppose one could argue that maybe not becoming, obama took over and over nine in a very unusual circumstance, huge majority in both houses, wind at his back but also apparently failed administration, huge financial crisis. he did various things we could second guess them or not, but rahm emanuel is as chief of staff, they're presumably because he understood how to manage congress
agree to get big compromises on these issues. >> can i add the role of history suggests the clinton and ronald reagan the second term as the productive term, the big achievement so it's hard to know whether the republican party will -- where they will push the blame if that happens, but the question is how they decide to spend the next four years and i think it's very hard to tell but there is some hope in looking back at both clinton and reagan. >> he was also a far right to limit took running the republican party at the time whoever they equivalent was a time and. but in fact he wasn't. life was a little more complicated by the fearful analogy. >> he raised taxes -- >> i think that's why the parties in opposition tend to be less responsible than parties of power. i think you probably agree. >> agree from your point of view i can think of the times when the other party the of irresponsibly in opposition and the question as it seems to me it from the is elected and you have the party that you think would be responsible and is in the position they have to govern and we will see what
within herself. bill and hillary clinton had a warm relationship with the "-- queen as well. like other presidents clinton was impressed with what he described as the clever manner in which he discussed public issues, probing the for information and insight without venturing too far into a expressing her own political views. he observed that the circumstance of her birth, she might have been a successful politician and diplomat. as it was, he said, she had to be both but without quite seeming to be either. george w. bush got off on the right foot, literally, with the queen during her 1991 visit. the president's 44-year-old eldest son was wearing custom-made cowboy boots to his parents' private luncheon upstairs of the white house. the texas rangers, is that on the boots, the queen asked? note -- no, ma'am, the young george joked. god save the queen. she left the nest, are you the black sheep in the family? i guess so, he said. the queen replied to all families have them. he asked, whose horse? don't answer that, said his mother, which let the queen escape from the conversation. the 43rd
bill clinton get away with claiming that the republicans were the ones who deregulated and created the real estate and financial problems when he repealed glass-steagall in 1999. i was the underpinning and away the whole problem. i would say a sushi pointer to because in 10 short years, all the big banks, almost all of them went under. so i just wonder how he can get away with that. that is one of the hallmarks that gave the campaign a bump for bill clinton's speech. is he just not want to admit it? or does he just know that people won't care or following research this? how does you make that statement front of everyone? >> host: maria bartiromo. >> guest: we are in political season. it's political folk all, all politics. and so, number one on the tax code, yes, that is what i just said. i agree with that. what could have seen change over the last three years of her going to complain about people not paying their fair share, change the tax code. it is all legal. if the money manager can use whatever loopholes are available to him or her to lower their tax expense, of course they're
penalties and to pinocchio's for the counter spin. also in particular the way that president clinton spoke about at the convention. so it's a complex subject and one of the reasons i didn't think romney would necessary bring it up himself into debates is because it would allow for a very muddy back and forth between the two men. i think and debate your most effective if you can make a clean shot. and resonate with voters. to my predictions, romney will repeat his claim that obama got $700 billion from medicare. now, during the primaries the republicans used to claim that obama fund his health care plan with $500 billion in cuts. so how did it balloon to $700 billion? is a simple explanation to the congressional budget office over the summer issued a new asset based on a different and later tenure timeline. and so republicans decided to take the biggest number possible. but medicare spending does not mean it is being reduced to in the $700 billion figure comes from the different over 10 years between anticipated medicare spending, what is known as the baseline, and changes to laws made to r
be turning over in his grave i think. [laughter] the president clinton face -- the preface of my book is to put things in a larger context, to talk a little bit, and when you have a chance to read the book about why we are where we are on poverty and to look ahead a little bit about what we need to do, and, of course, the harder question for all of us is how we can create a politics where these issues and many others take a different turn, a better turn, in our country. ronald reagan said we fought a war on poverty and poverty won. well well-known, everybody heard that. the first thing i want to say, and i, of course, say in the book is that ronald reagan was wrong. [laughter] about many things. [laughter] the fact is, and we need to celebrate this that the public policies that we have from social security to a long list of earned income tax credit and food stamps and so on are keeping 40 million people out of poverty so that out of the 46 million people we have in poverty, which is certainly bad enough and then some, we would be at 8 # -- 86 million without the -- all of the policies
clinton the lines converged. in 2000, gore ran for points better. carry six, obama seven. today it's nine or ten. beckham i would argue that this class and version is going to have to get wider. what this has done is produce an environment in which for all the numbers talking about, the victory came to just to numbers. the 40. as you said to me 180% in the 08. if he matches that and they represent at least the toyota 6% they did last time he only needs 40 percent of whites. in fact, as they were saying, the internal composition is changing in a way that makes it more accessible from to get there. you know, to me you have to look not only in education but gender and basically it creates four quadrants. if you look at el eight college white man, not college white man, and on college what women. obama was at 42 or below. he will drop in all three of those quadrants this time. numbers are consistently running a little lower than they did in l.a., and on college men and women and the college men. the fourth quarter with a college-educated white women, and he won a majority of them last time. i
comprises on the big issues. >> can i add, i mean, a little history can clinton and rage. the second term was the productive term. the big achievement. it's hard no know whether the republican party will -- where they will push the blame if that happens. but the question is how they decide to spend the next four years. and i think it's very hard to tell. but there is some hope in looking back at both clinton and reagan. >> reagan was considered a far-right lunatic running a far right republican party, by the way, at the time. by whoever the equivalent was at the time. maybe it was tom freedman. in fact he wasn't. >>, i mean, life is more complicated despite the analogy. >> he raced. he raised taxes when he needed to . >> he did a lot of things and, you know, that's why i think parties in opposition tend to be less responsible than parties in power. i think you probably agree with that. >> what's different. >> difference in agreeing from your point of view. i can think of times when the other party also behavedder responsely in the opposition and the question is, it seems to me is if romne
the gain a downscale and the democratic cannot scale to the point where under clinton the lines converged and ran and won the college nights and on college 36, obama, seven and today in the polling is nine or ten. i would argue that obama wins the class conversion is going to have to get brighter. what this has done is produce an environment in which for all the numbers we are talking about, the obama formula victory can be produced at just to members of mabey effort on the side to the and to what 80% of the nonwhite voters in zero age, not just that in 2012 and they represent at least 26% they did last time in the 40% of whites. and in fact as we were saying, the internal composition of the white vote is changing in a way that makes it more accessible for him to get their. for me you have to look not only get education but gender and basically creates the four quadrants. if you look at 08, the college white men, non-mccaul which white men and women, obama was 42 or below. he will drop in all three of those. the numbers are consistently running a little lower than they did. the college-ed
there be a committee to look at the decision but on the today secretary clinton says this is a mistake. if you do with the enemy in the middle east you don't play in the middle east, jerusalem or be an up. if you went to convince someone but in my book we have to take action but i think what has happened to in the last month as a decision our friend in canada took to close the embassy in tehran. embassy in tehran. we should have done that years ago. in two weeks time we are traveling again to the u.s. but then go back to ram with the race for the nuclear bomb. if iran becomes nuclear we are on the front lines. listen to what the people are saying. very clearly. we will wipe out israel. when the united states of america then we go after this sunday people, the christians to send you a message. you have to wake up many people think not in my backyard. if it is it is really is a year backyard. what is the connection between hezbollah and iran and venezuela? why do they work together and they fly a the slides from here to caracas? hatred of the shared values the american values of what you represent.
. he said similar things as a senator against secretary clinton, pushing the stop hillary campaign when you were chairman of the senate republican campaign committee. some of it might just be kind of sports or competitive rhetoric, but that's not what it's going to take to fix washington. we need more bridge builders. we need more people who want to listen and find common ground. that's the one thing we are missing in congress right now, and we've got to put people in place to have a demonstrated track record of being able to do it. >> moderator: tim gunn you pick out certain quotes from it, and let me share some quotes with other folks have said about our records. records of service to the "washington post" which really says anything good about republicans said this about my service in governor. quote, while some democrats in richmond may hold their applause and factor general assembly in fact, the fact is that governor allen has been markedly successful in generating business investment in virginia. virginia education association said that our education budget was the best they've see
remember myself suggest to mr.tsu, general tsu, you know, becombill clinton the next prime minister. but for some reason, mr. tsu, you know, didn't accept the offer. so from there we go to the next and the next and the next, all senior and high ranking in the army. but they all refuse. so a the end of the day and everything, you know, the armed forces didn't come to find someone, you know. so at one moment, he come to me and he said, hey, ky, we all discussed and we think you are the most qualified for the job. and anyway, no one there to accept that kind of, you know, responsibilities. so i said to him, if that is the will, the desire of all the members, then i accept it. and the next day, i become the new premier. no, you know, still today there are some opinion of some people still speculate that i become premier after myself and a group of young officer stage a military coup. that's not true. i never staged a coup. they picked me up. i can say they forced me to become premier, maybe hoping that by that way they send me to the electric chair. >> at the time that you were premier
to change in the '70s and 60s with republicans making games. to the point where under clinton the lines converge. today in pulling it is nine or 10. in fact, i would argue that obama wins, this class in version has to get wide. what it is done is produce an invite i think in which for all the nuns were talking about, the obama formula for victory can be reduced to just two numbers with maybe a third one on the side, 80-40. if he matches that in 2012 and those nonwhite voters represent at least 26% they did last time he only needs 40% of whites to win. and, in fact, as we were saying the internal composition of the white vote is change in the way that makes it more accessible for him to get there. to me you have to look not only at education agenda. basically it creates four quadrant. if you look at the way, college wightman, noncollege white men, and noncollege white women, obama was at 42 orbital. he will drop in all three of those quadrants. his numbers are consistently running a little lower than they did in a weight among the noncollege men, noncollege women. the fourth quadrant is
,000 a year, that we should go back to the race we had when bill clinton was president, when we created 22 million jobs, what from deficit to surplus and created a whole created a lot of millionaires to boot. the reason this is important is because they doing that we can not only reduce the deficit. we can not only encourage job growth of small businesses, but were also to make investments necessary in education or in energy. and we do have a difference when it comes to definitions of small business. under my plan, 97% of small businesses would not see their income taxes go up. governor romney says well, those top 3% of the job creators they burdened. under governor romney's definition, as a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires who are small-business. donald trump is a small business. i know donald trump doesn't like to think of himself as small anything, but that is how you define small businesses after getting small-business income. that kind of approach i believe will not grow our economy because the only way to pay for without either burdening the middle-class or blowing up our
, form something called the liberty league to deny fdr a second term. and then with bill clinton of course was richard miller gates who funded all the investigations and led to paula jones come on and on, the articles in "the american spectator." but nothing compared to the money and the organization that we have seen on the part of charles and david koch, who are the heads of koch industries. they are the third and fourth richest man in america. we know about bill gates and warren buffett. these are number three and number four, combined wealth of $50 billion. they have put more money and -- by the way i have to say this. they do some good things, particularly david koch was the wealthiest man in new york city. you thought michael bloomberg was. no, it's david koch. but he funded the metropolitan museum of art, cancer research centers around the country. but most of their money goes into political activities. and they are everywhere. the heritage foundation in washington, d.c., koch brothers. the cato institute, when it started, koch brothers. some of you may know now that koch
there will be a committee to look at the decision in the u.n. but also invite the u.s., secretary clinton said only a few hours ago, we should not put any red lines to iran. when you deal with the enemies in the middle east, you don't play according to the rules of washington, d.c., jerusalem or vienna. it is a different ball game. it's a different language. if you want to work with somebody in iran to stop the nuclear race, you have to take action. and in my book i worried very directly that it is not enough to talk. we need to take action. and we have seen that sanctions are not crippling sanctions. and i think what happened the last month in the decision that our friend in canada took to close the embassy in tehran, it is a brave decision. we should have done it years ago. because the people in iran, they look at what's happening here. in two weeks' time, ahmadinejad will be traveling again to the u.s., he will go to the u.n., he will deliver a nice speech, but then he will go back to iran, and he will continue with the race to build that nuclear bomb. in my book i spoke a lot about israel, but it aff
. certainly people say gosh, bill clinton's security act was completed, but over the subsequent 20 years you did have a number of expansion after his boat in the medicaid program that the public rolling coverage has expanded dramatically. so i think it's very hard to see how you reversed the creation of the exchange and i think that it will evolve into a different system and something that conservatives and liberals will duke out over. i think it's going to make coverage absolutely essential to our politics. and so, then you're going to see a generation of republicans who would reconcile themselves to an basically talk about how to be fixated? fanuc investments or how much medicare would cost 30 years out when the program was created, they did not quite come true. in a way it is a lesson for republicans because in 1964 you had goldwater served as the nominee and the result of that was you had enormous democratic super majorities and you are able to see the creation of programs when you think about conservatives right now, fiscal conservatives are still wrestling with the legacy of medicare a
research on the 990 has taught us one thing which is that hillary clinton was right when she said in 1990 whenever that there is a vast right wing conspiracy. there is also a left-wing conspiracy. and on this light you can see the larger network of groups, the conservative network. and the smaller network is the liberal network, at least what we have been able to find. again, this is not a complete picture. this is -- this particular slide is something we worked on with newsweek and the daily beast recently. and if you go online and find this graphic, it is interactive. you can click on any of the little dots and see what groups those are. it is a great, great little thing. one thing you notice is that a lot of the arrows are going in both directions, so groups give money, they get money. the center to protect patients' rights is kind of a big mayor center there. you will see pharma at the top, which actually gives to both sides which kind of reflects the business philosophy to kind of play it safe. but a lot of these groups on both sides are giving to each other. sloshing the money aroun
else. this is math. president clinton said it. this is arithmetic, and we can take that money that we are spending, $225,000 per year and spend the copley to get teachers that want to come into the profession. about that difficult, hard work. at the end of the day, it's marginal. it is symbolic. it's about like a child in the family, and it's about those who need to do their homework. that's not what makes the difference. it is the expectation that they will do their homework and they will not show up the next day without it. >> hold on for second, let's get the microphone. >> hello, i work for in metropolitan detroit. i would like to talk about something regarding not being able to cut your way to excellence. it is really good teacher but a pilot program, but when we are talking about taking the success and charter and making it large-scale, rolling it over to a public school, how do you get the best teachers and how do you motivate the teachers who are already in the system. i would like for either one of you to address that. >> it is a very contentious five-day training program and
, they built the repeal. the repeal, for those of you that don't know, was signed by bill clinton as president, helping to deregulate. what did we have? the taxes on the rich were discontinued. the regulations were discontinued. what is it that we saw. we saw that by not changing the organization of capitalist enterprises, we left in place people would be incentives and resources to do everything they are going to achieve in the depression. it is sort of like winning a war, but leaving the other army in place with all of its armaments. knowing that they have a lot of resentments about how it ended up. they might, you know, use their weapons to try again. if you leave in place a corporate capitalist structure, a small group of major shareholders who own the shares in their hands, they therefore select the board of directors and and remember what a board of directors doesn't every corporation? it decides what you produce, however pursuits, were to produce, and what to do with the profits. were americans, it is a fundamental and moral political issue. here we are in a country, after all, which cl
've seen out of the republicans this campaign season. >> did a lot of them come out of the clinton administration? did they have a lot of experience in that? >> there were a number, but there have been more. i think we have seen a generational development in the bench. some people who did not serve in the clinton administration are serving in senior positions here. i think that they are smart, i think they understand how to play as a team, they understand how to listen, and they get along with each other. and i think in part that's because you don't have the right wingers versus the nationalists versus the elder statesman. you have a generation whose views have been formed by the realities of of the 21st centur, and i think you're seeing that reflected not just in president obama, but in the team that supports him. >> yeah. the way i like to put it is that president obama has the appeal of a reluctant warrior, which is what most americans are. if we have to go to war, we will. and he has shown that he will use force when it's necessary, but he's a reluctant warrior. reluctant warri
it with welfare benefits however this time abacus joined by governors congress and the clinton administration agreed that a significant infusion of new childcare funds were necessary if low-income women were going to face increase work requirements. this led to a second version of the senate bill that included a 4 billion-dollar increase in childcare funds over five years. the tanf bill included a provision that allowed some tanf funding to be transferred to ccpg. it was absolutely clear in that debate that most of the low-income women expected to work were not going going to earn enough to pay for childcare. this is still true. the battle over quality was eliminated. the governors leading the welfare discussion and many republicans in in the house wanted to completely eliminate the minimum standards in the quality set aside. after a long fight we wanted bipartisan support. maintain both that we lost the requirement in the market rate. there was no meaningful discussion of improvement over those two years. with these new funds in additional funding later in the clinton administration states
clinton and i will ever worked closely together and then barbara bush was refrained in the fifth son. [laughter] now he works with president george w. bush as well. at that time i was interviewing president bush is when i was doing a series of pieces on the president and the constitution and the same set of interviews i interviewed president ford and its the last time i saw hampshire and he said you know, i want to see what's going on in washington after his years in the house of representatives. when i was gonna norti lever of the house and you're father, my father was the majority leader of the house he said when we were a minority and majority leader they go down to feed press club or something and solomon say willie going to argue about clarke's piece said there's a legitimate d date. we genuinely disagree about the means to an end. and it was partisan. for heaven's sake we were the leaders of the party but then we get back and our best friends and go back to the hill and are able to be civil with each other, have a drink together and be very good friends. they were such good fri
because hillary clinton is a political figure and a figure who is not as intensely disliked by kind of less affluent republicans i think. she's someone with a very distinctive political identity. >> i think the basic question will be is there a voice that says the party has to change direction, try to reach a broader range of voters. particularly minority voters. and does that debate -- certainly there are no shortages of candidates. brian. christie i think is kind of the voice from the bleacher shtick did not scale up, and i think kind of ralph cram them kind of running for president didn't look as good in tampa. i think he would have to retool to be sure but i think daniels, ryan, different ways, i think the bigger question is, is there something come is there a candidate to advance his agenda pushed analysis if romney loses. it's not guaranteed romney will lose. obama after three great weeks is at 50 so it's not like he is at 54 with a big margin of error. that if romney doesn't lose, i think the big question will be is there someone who kind of challenges the party on issues, pa
minimal with the first ladies, other than hillary clinton. but i think ann romney was quoted the other day by radio iowa saying about the criticism, stop it, this is hard. and i got a lot of e-mails about that, either when we did something on the blog, bearing from coming in, good for her to, doesn't she get it? was another one, keep to can you imagine if michelle obama had said that? people would've been angry. i thought it was a very, i think was probably not something the campaign as a structure would've wanted as a statement on the because it's not their message. but i thought it was a very human thing. she was talking about her husband, she is experienced with getting beat up. i guess the response to that is you chose to run for office and yes, it is hard. what we demand from our candidates is a lot in the country. even for the criticism that ron is getting about not doing enough in terms of events. he is doing a tremendous number of fund-raising events. it's incredibly hard and incredibly grueling. i can't imagine watching my husband go through it. my husband has a similar reaction i
. we had a government shut down. newt gingrich i clinton. once the government shut down, the pressure on both sides was so intense there was a deal in less than three weeks. the pressure, if we go into january, will be far greater than it was then because the economic consequences and the market consequences are more significant. i think it's inconceivable that if we go into january, there won't be a settlement in january, early february at the latest. we hit the debt ceiling in february anyway. there has to be a settlement. somebody has to blink, probably both sides blink to some degree. i've talked a little bit to people in financial markets in new york about how they think the markets would react to all of this. the reaction i've got is there's a lot of nervousness, a lot of volatility in the markets in january. if there is a deal in a few weeks, and any deal clearly makes retroactive to january 1st, the tax cuts continued, and we'll remove sequesteration, then what i'm told is in the interim the damage really won't be that significant. now, for fiscal hawks, many of us have been s
, and let me quote president clinton, it takes an awful lot of breast to so much accuse me of doing something they have done twice. >> moderator: senator heller? heller: i never heard so and give an answer what they said they didn't do it and then said they did in the same spell. the of the year, continue to tell the light of your even with confidence. is still the light of the year. she talks about the ryan budget. she talks to bring it to the fore. all it wants is -- and when are the ryan budget was going to pass. what we need is a democrat budget. we couldn't get a democrat budget out of the united states center. we couldn't get the majority leader to have a budget hearing. couldn't happen. i don't feel like have to explain this to my own opponent. bunch of republican budget, a democrat budget and you bring them together and you solve the issues. that's my goal. i want solutions. but you can have solutions if one side is not going to talk. >> moderator: thank you. diego has the next question. he will attest to congresswoman congresswoman shelley berkley. >> in january 2007, the t
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36